ACamp1900
Reaction score
11,225

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • H
    LOL.... This organization is so out of touch. I go where Brady goes.
    H
    Brady's lookin' good, Bud....160 yards in the first half, one td.
    lol nah man, i meant operator as in sitting on the couch playing halo and madden all day. my brother had a bunch of red lights of death on his until he finally sent in to get fixed, you should probably do the same.
    H
    What's up Brotha Man??? Thought I'd pop in and say hello. Hope everything is going great!

    DG
    H
    Hey bud!!! Hope all is well. Haven't talk to you in a while.
    G
    acamp, keep up the good work.
    Thanks for the request. My first friend at IE. Well someone named reggieho asked me along time ago, but I have know ideal who that is. At least with you I know your one of the big boys and well respected.
    I'd make some joke about the sexuality of Cleveland's back up QB, but I can't bring myself to do it.
    H
    ACamp in da house!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    H
    They don't know.... My dad is getting that for them for Christmas. Sweetness. I can only hope he can come as well.
    I will tell you what is wrong with inland Empire. All those 909 *******s in their lifted trucks and famous stars and straps t shirts acting like their the toughest SOB's to ever walk the earth

    They are Cali's answer to the jersey shore guido. It's embarrassing.
    the following few posts are an article today from the Washington Post... just HAD to share this one... hits home in a major way.

    --- Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the "bitter" people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging "to guns or religion or" -- this part is less remembered -- "antipathy toward people who aren't like them."
    That's a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry. And promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking.
    -- Resistance to the vast expansion of government power, intrusiveness and debt, as represented by the Tea Party movement? Why, racist resentment toward a black president.

    -- Disgust and alarm with the federal government's unwillingness to curb illegal immigration, as crystallized in the Arizona law? Nativism.

    -- Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? Homophobia.

    -- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.

    Now we know why the country has become "ungovernable," last year's excuse for the Democrats' failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, homophobic Islamophobes?
    Note what connects these issues. In every one, liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion. Majorities -- often lopsided majorities -- oppose President Obama's social-democratic agenda (e.g., the stimulus, Obamacare), support the Arizona law, oppose gay marriage and reject a mosque near Ground Zero.

    What's a liberal to do? Pull out the bigotry charge, the trump that preempts debate and gives no credit to the seriousness and substance of the contrary argument. The most venerable of these trumps is, of course, the race card. When the Tea Party arose, a spontaneous, leaderless and perfectly natural (and traditionally American) reaction to the vast expansion of government intrinsic to the president's proudly proclaimed transformational agenda, the liberal commentariat cast it as a mob of angry white yahoos disguising their antipathy to a black president by cleverly speaking in economic terms.
    Then came Arizona and S.B. 1070. It seems impossible for the left to believe that people of good will could hold that: (a) illegal immigration should be illegal, (b) the federal government should not hold border enforcement hostage to comprehensive reform, i.e., amnesty, (c) every country has the right to determine the composition of its immigrant population.

    As for Proposition 8, is it so hard to see why people might believe that a single judge overturning the will of 7 million voters is an affront to democracy? And that seeing merit in retaining the structure of the most ancient and fundamental of all social institutions is something other than an alleged hatred of gays -- particularly since the opposite-gender requirement has characterized virtually every society in all the millennia until just a few years ago?
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Top